WRITTEN QUESTION E-0750/02 by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Commission. The full cost of Strasbourg sessions.
Date: 2002-03-15
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Parliament, European official, France, air transport, allowances and expenses, operating cost, seat of institution

26.9.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 229 E/131

Does the Council not agree, for instance, that Bossi’s remark that ‘the alliance of masons, fascists, Nazis
and Communists was responsible for the European Charter of Rights’ constitutes a rejection of the very
principles established by the Charter and not merely a rather blunt and violent criticism of the Charter
itself?

Would it agree that Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi’s failure to criticise the above statements, while being
present at the Lega congress, means that the entire Italian Government may be considered to endorse these
coarse and undignified anti-democratic views?

Would the Council not therefore consider it essential to initiate the procedure under Article 7 of the TEU
against Italy?

Joint answer
to Written Questions P-0748/02, P-0756/02, P-0757/02 and P-0779/02

(26 June 2002)

The Council would inform the Honourable Member that it is not in the habit of commenting on
statements made by political figures.

(2002/C 229 E/149)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0750/02

by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(15 March 2002)

Subject: The full cost of Strasbourg sessions

Have any independent studies been commissioned into the full cost of having a separate Parliament in
Strasbourg, including the capital and maintenance costs of the Strasbourg Parliament itself, the cost of
special trains, the transport of documents and the travel and accommodation costs of the Members’
personal staff as well as those working for the secretariats of the European institutions?

Does the Commission believe that the French government has done enough to improve direct air links
with other European countries at the time of the sessions in order to reduce the considerable difficulties
faced by many Members in travelling to and from Strasbourg?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(25 April 2002)

The Commission has not commissioned independent studies such as those mentioned by the Honourable
Member and is not aware that anyone else has.

transport and accommodation costs,

On the issue of
the
Commission refers the Honourable Member to the detailed information provided in its answers to Written
Questions E-1733/99 by Mr Costa (1), E-2467/99 by Mrs Raschhofer (2) and oral question H-0747/00 by
Mr Corbett during question time at Parliament’s October 2000 session (3). It is understood that there have
travel and
been no changes other than those attributable to normal movements in the cost of
accommodation since that time.

including the transport of documents,

On the second part of the Honourable Member’s question, it is the understanding of the Commission that
the French government does not have responsibility for deciding civil aviation passenger routes and
frequencies within France or between France and other airports of origin and destination.

Naturally, the Commission is aware that several people, in Parliament and from other Institutions, who
in Strasbourg
have official duties that require their presence at plenary Sessions of the Parliament
the
experience difficulties in gaining convenient aviation connections to and from the city. Whilst

C 229 E/132

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

26.9.2002

Commission has no authority in such matters, it nevertheless continues to hope that airline operators will
recognise the significance and the necessity of travel to and from Strasbourg as one of the seats of the
European Parliament and will consequently seek to ensure increased convenience of travel to and from the
city at reasonable prices.

(1) OJ C 203 E, 18.7.2000.
(2) OJ C 280 E, 3.10.2000.
(3) Written reply, 4.10.2000.

(2002/C 229 E/150)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0751/02

by Caroline Lucas (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(19 March 2002)

Subject: Private Finance Initiatives (PFIs) in the UK

Is the Council aware of the PFI approach in the UK and does the Council consider it to be in line with
existing public procurement legislation? Furthermore, does the Council judge that such practices are in line
with the Commission’s proposal for a new directive on the coordination of procedures for the award of
public supply contracts, public service contracts and public work contracts (1), particularly with regard to
Articles 1.7 and 32? Finally, what would the Council’s evaluation be of the consequences were the
Directive to be amended according to the amendments passed by the European Parliament, in particular
Amendment 24?

(1) COM(2000) 275 final D OJ C 29 E, 30.1.2001, p. 11.

Reply

(26 June 2002)

It is not the Council’s habit to give its views on a text which is undergoing the legislative procedure
leading to its adoption. It invites the Honourable Member to put her question to the Commission as
regards compatibility of the methods referred to with the proposal for a new Directive.

(2002/C 229 E/151)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0755/02

by Jorge Hernández Mollar (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Interreg III A programme (Almería)

(19 March 2002)

The exclusion of the Province of Almería (autonomous community of Andalusia) from the Interreg III A
programme of funding, which focuses on cross-border cooperation with Morocco, has given rise to much
concern among the inhabitants of the province owing to the fact that its proximity to Morocco means that
the two areas have many common interests deriving from the constant flow of persons and goods through
the province’s port and the large number of Moroccan citizens who have been drawn into the province by
its agricultural development.

Given the above, why does the Province of Almería not come within the scope of the Interreg II

1.
programme which was adopted in 1992?

In view of the fact that the province was again left out of the Interreg III A programme in 1999
2.
(covering the period 2000 to 2006), what likelihood is there of it being included in the next Interreg
programme which will be drawn up at the end of the current programme?

Is there any possibility of the province being able to benefit from the programme during the 2003 to

3.
2006 financial years, and if so, what procedures should be followed?